Hunter Power Project (Kurri Kurri Power Station)

9/06/2021
Submission against Kurri Kurri Power Station – Objection

I object to the Snowy Hydro proposal to build a new gas fired power station at Kurri Kurri NSW, with $600 million public funding for this project.
Climate scientists say we are in climate emergency and that this decade it is critical that strong global efforts are made to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as fast as possible to prevent global warming reaching 1.5 degrees C.
Gas is not clean energy. It is a fossil fuel and scientists say gas fired power is just as polluting as coal fired power when fugitive emissions of gas during extraction, transport & use are taken into account.

Committing to new fossil fuel fired power projects, with massive public funding, such as a gas power station at Kurri Kurri would discourage investment in renewable energy, at a time when all reputable scientific agencies say all efforts need to be put into transitioning to renewable energy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions asap to zero.
This project is totally at odds with a zero emissions target to address the climate emergency.

Right now, the western states of the US are experienced severe drought, much worse than the drought which preceded their most destructive wild fire season to date. Fire experts have shown that in Australia we will face worsening and closer together extreme & catastrophic level fires.
Australians have already lived through several extreme weather events in the last two years, including Black Summer bushfires, prolonged drought, intense heatwaves and major floods, all of which are linked to global warming from the accumulation of GHGs in the atmosphere. The Great Barrier Reef has also been severely affected by another mass bleaching event occurring in 2020…just 3 years after the previous back-to-back mass bleaching events, from which the GBR had not recovered. These 3 events in just 5 years have caused the loss of 50% of corals on the GBR.

With this ongoing climate crisis we have a responsibility to do our utmost to play our part in cutting global GHG emissions.

I object to the grounds for the Kurri project, according to the government, being for the jobs, when in fact the facility will provide very few jobs long term. The project adds to the climate impacts on the GBR which supports 69 000 jobs, while GBR also performs priceless ecosystem services such as providing the breeding habitat necessary for sustainable fisheries.

Experts say that expansionary fossil fuel policies and building new fossil fuel infrastructure, including gas power stations, puts more Australian lives, livelihoods and ecosystems in danger.

A planned and orderly transition to renewable energy, including upgrade projects to properly integrate new renewable energy supplies to the grid, would provide many more jobs than this gas fired power project.

I object to the proposal to build this fossil fuel power station also because there is no need for a new gas power station. AEMO’s Electricity Statement of Opportunities 2020 report, found that NSW was not expected to exceed the Reliability Standard at any point to 2028-29. On the stricter Interim Reliability Measure, a capacity shortfall of just 154MW is identified after the Liddell power station closes in 2023-24. AEMO expects this small gap to be filled by “the New South Wales Government’s commitment to provide capital projects funding to 170 MW of dispatchable capacity under its Emerging Energy Program”. Source:
https://aemo.com.au/-/media/files/electricity/nem/planning_and_forecasting/nem_esoo/2020/2020-electricity-statement-of-opportunities.pdf?la=en&hash=85DC43733822F2B03B23518229C6F1B2

The proponent, Snowy Hydro, presents no information to back its claim that this gas power station is necessary. In fact, Snowy Hydro already operates a gas power station not far away at Colongra on the Central Coast which is used 1% of the time.

The use of gas for producing power is expensive and has already pushed electricity prices much higher, due to there being no domestic reserve and local pricing linked to export prices. This project can only increase reliance on expensive and finite gas, at a time when we could instead implement renewable energy projects such as new wind and solar projects with storage provided by local pumped hydro projects or large battery storage to be used during peak demand times.

The gas supply for this project would unnecessarily create demand for new gas fields and new pipelines which otherwise are just not needed. These gas fields and pipelines are strongly opposed by the communities and farmers that would be impacted, and the projects are at odds with Australia’s GHG emissions target.

Gas power stations can be unreliable. This was made clear in February 2017, when Snowy Hydro’s existing Colongra gas power station failed to start due to low gas pressure in its supply lines, forcing AEMO to protect the grid by ordering the Tomago Aluminium Smelter to cut demand. This brings into question the claim that gas power stations can always act as a reliable backup.

The Australia Institute’s Gas and Coal Watch has found that over summer a substantial gas or coal fired power station trips every 3–4 days on average as they do not handle heat waves well.

This underlines the need for technology that can handle the increased heat of current global warming and that which is best suited to meeting peak demand for electricity on hot days. Energy experts say renewable energy can meet these requirements and has a many advantages when it comes to matching increased electricity demand. Rooftop solar has saved us from major blackouts by households getting their power needs directly from the solar panels on their roof instead of drawing from the grid, delaying or avoiding the point of reaching peak demand. For peak demand, battery storage & pumped hydro is not affected by heat like peaking gas fired power stations have proven to be.
These, already cheaper to implement, renewable technologies can provide the clean and affordable power needed, and can perform more reliably than gas power production during extreme conditions. These renewable alternatives are also attracting major investment from the private sector, avoiding the use of hundreds of millions of public funds for a gas project that private enterprise is unwilling to fund due to the major risk of gas projects soon becoming stranded assets due to worldwide pressure & need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The proponents say the plant would be ‘hydrogen ready’ for creating power using hydrogen instead of methane, but the ability to change to a hydrogen facility would require major upgrades. And burning hydrogen for power would still be way more expensive than the already cheap and affordable renewable energy technologies already mentioned here.

We must move as rapidly as possible to renewable technologies to meet our green house gas reduction commitments. Australia cannot steeply reduce GHG emissions by expanding the extraction, transport & burning of fossil fuels at what climate scientists tell us is a critical decade for action of climate change.
Australia is the most vulnerable developed country to the effects of a warming climate. We have already seen the impacts of 1.44 degrees C warming in our country.
Our government has a moral responsibility to Australian citizens to implement only power projects which will help decrease the risk of further climate change impacts from human caused greenhouse gas emissions.
I also object to the project on the grounds that there would be a major impact to the local Kurri Kurri community in the form of air pollution from the by-products of gas combustion being emitted into the air, along with noise pollution & property & lifestyle affected by adverse visual impact of a gas fired power station, which is simply not needed.

Sincerely,

Ann Flynn
Sydney, NSW

Dear Sir/Madam

I am a parent living in Sydney and concerned about the future health of my children due to climate change. Not only does building more gas-powered plants move us further away from reaching net zero, it harms the health of people living in the region and is a poor use of taxpayer dollars.

My parents live in the Hunter Valley and they are already subjected to poor air quality due to the fossil fuel industry. The proposal neglects to include significant amounts of air pollution which is misleading to the public. Not only will this project impact the health of families living in the Hunter Valley, it will also impact the health of future generations due to the fact that natural gas releases methane which is a toxic greenhouse gas (20 times more potent than C02) and will impact the health of our children and future generations.


The NSW Government has committed to net zero emissions by 2050 and 35% reduction in emissions by 2030 vs 2005 levels. Building another gas-powered plant in NSW is incompatible with these climate targets. Kurri Kurri will emit 500,000 tCO2e per year equivalent to carbon sequestration potential of 8.3 million trees. Sharma v Minister for the Environment (May 29, 2021) established a “new duty of care to protect young people from foreseeable future climate change harms” and establishes a clear link between fossil fuel projects and those harms.

We are committed to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, designed to protect our environment. Climate change is threatening our environment and adding emissions will contribute to climate change. NSW Govt has a commitment to it’s targets to reduce emissions not add to them.


The project also makes no economic sense. “Using gas to create electricity is a really expensive way to do it. If you’re interested in driving down economic prices, then you’d be mad to use gas” Matt Kean, NSW Energy & Environment Minister. There are cheaper and cleaner ways to meet AEMO’s 154MW shortfall, such as battery storage proposed by AGL. Using taxpayer dollars to fund a project that is expensive and uncommercial is a waste of our money and unacceptable.

I am greatly opposed to this project due to economic, health and environmental reasons well documented by experts.


Yours sincerely

Katrina Chandler
22 Hopetoun Avenue
Mosman NSW 2088

I wish to strongly object to this project. The scale and proximity of the climate emergency demands that we rapidly shift away from fossil fuels. The Commonwealth government’s 2021 Budget investment of $600m of taxpayer money into a new gas power plant is unconscionable. The proposal makes no economic sense, it is not considered necessary by the energy sector. It will be more expensive than renewable generation options combined with energy storage. It will not create the jobs that the renewable sector would generate.
It will saddle the Australian people with a hugely expensive white elephant for years to come.

The government has a duty of care to all children and future children to deliver them a world safe to live in. Continuing to burn fossil fuels will not enable the government to do this.
Please, for the sake of all future Australians, future world citizens, and the other animals that we share this beautiful planet with, start to make alternative plans to dirty fuels.
Try wave energy - never stops. Or stored hydro. It only needs empty mining pits which the Hunter valley is littered with. Make the Hunter into a power house of renewables, and set up industries that use this power to employ displaced miners.

PLEASE.

Please see attached submission.

Please see submission attached

The International Energy Agency said in their recent report that there must be no more fossil fuel energy projects if the world is to meet the Paris climate target. Australia signed the Paris agreement. We have an obligation to reduce emissions and start developing alternate energy sources.

HEL objects to the proposal on the grounds of dangerous climate change that this proposal will exacerbate

Submission in response to Hunter Power Project (Kurri Kurri Power Station)

IEA SAYS NO to NEW FOSSIL FUEL INFRASTRUCTURE
The world is rapidly accelerating away from the use of all fossil fuels. There is an increasingly urgent realisation that time is of the essence if humanity is to achieve net zero CO2 emissions by 2050. Very recently the International Energy Agency (traditionally a supporter of fossil fuels) stated that no new coal, oil or gas infrastructure is possible anywhere in the world if we are to meet this goal. So the Kurri Gas project would likely become a waste of taxpayers’ money in the form of stranded assets, once investment in gas production became uneconomic owing to encroaching international pressure.

NO NEED FOR GAS HERE
The Kurri Gas proposal would be both a step backwards and functionally redundant given recent initiatives in battery and solar infrastructure plans sponsored for the Hunter region by both private investors and the NSW Government. These sources are designed to provide reliable delivery to both domestic consumers and to industry (including support for manufacturing that requires continuity of supply to avoid prohibitively costly shut-downs such as the Tomago aluminium smelter).

NEED FORWARD-LOOKING IMAGE TO ATTRACT INVESTMENT
The Hunter Valley is one of Australia’s major energy-producing regions - historically a source of raw materials and energy production from fossil fuels for both export and domestic consumption. The task of transition to a new economic base is therefore its major immediate and foreseeable challenge. Failure to achieve this successfully would result in dire economic and social consequences for the region and beyond.

NEED TO RETAIN INVESTOR MOMENTUM
Australia and its energy-producing regions have an unprecedented opportunity to develop and promote renewable technologies including hydrogen, according to the former Chief Scientist Dr Alan Finkel and currently under development (Hunter Hydrogen Network). The University of Newcastle with its world-class electrical engineering expertise is also based locally. The proposal to adopt last-century fossil-fuel technology does not project an image that promotes renewables entrepreneurship and investment in the region.

NO GAS YET ANYWAY
Even in the short term, gas supply to this project is not guaranteed as it largely depends on approval of the Narrabri Gas Project and the Hunter Pipeline through agricultural land, both of which are highly contentious. And in the absence of gas supply, the project would operate on diesel fuel which has even more detrimental environmental downsides.

PURELY POLITCAL MOTIVATION
In consideration of the above, and as electricity supply is a State matter, the intervention of the Federal Government via Snowy Hydro (who also own the Colongra plant on the Central Coast which would also be available to provide power if needed) is curious and would appear to be solely for political reasons.

SUMMARY
A comprehensive summary of the significant issues that mitigate against this proposal is presented in the submission by the Climate Council, and I concur with their conclusion that the proposal should be rejected: https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Kurri-kurri-sub-1-June-FINAL.pdf

I wish to express my opposition to the proposed Kurri Kurri gas power plant. I am a mum of two young children (10 and 13) and I am deeply concerned about the future they are facing with extreme weather affecting the availability of food and fresh water, loss of biodiversity, increased conflict over resources. I am a member of Hornsby Shire Climate Action and Australian Parents for Climate Action.
I view the proposed gas power plant as another piece of infrastructure that takes us closer to an unsustainable and unstable future. It seems unconscionable that we are replacing a coal-fired power plant with another fossil fuel power plant. Gas is a fossil fuel and its extraction and burning drives climate change.
The EIS states that the plant will emit 500,000 t Co2e per year over a period of thirty years. This equates to 0.4% of NSW’s total emissions (despite a very low number of operating hours). The NSW Government has put in place its Net Zero Plan Stage 1: 2020-2030, which provides the foundations for reaching net zero emissions by 2050 with a focus on reducing emissions by 35% by 2030 compared to 2005 levels. When it comes to the electricity sector renewable energy and battery storage will help NSW reach its emission goals, a new gas power plant will not.
In addition to its CO2e emissions, the proposed gas power plant will also emit a number of noxious gases and particulate matters, including Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), Carbon Monoxide (CO), Sulfur Dioxide, PM10 and PM2.5.
This will impact the health and wellbeing of residents in the area of the power plant and further away. Both my children suffer from asthma and as a mum it is always something I worry about, and my view is that everything should be done to protect children’s health – this includes not polluting the air they breathe.
The estimated cost to taxpayers of $610,000,000 for a project deemed unnecessary by the energy sector and regulators seems to be a reckless use of resources. I will quote Ross Garnault about this investment “We are burying banknotes”.
These are just a few reasons why I object to this proposal.

I object to this project because I believe we should be funding renewable energy rather than fossil fuels. The technology is available to ensure reliable supply of electricity through the use of solar thermal, hydrogen and batteries. The gas fired power station will produce greenhouse gasses and is likely to be uneconomic in the near future due to this impact. The fact the project is reliant on public funding demonstrates its lack of long-term economic viability.

HCEC objects to the Hunter Power Project

The Hunter Gas Alliance strongly opposes the project.

Please note that the CSV files that we intended to upload had to be converted to PDF's and this has deemed one of them unreadable. Can you please inform us of an email address that we can send the CSV files to.
Carly Phillips

Attached.

I am hoping you will accept my late objection to this polluting project – Gas is not only polluting but expensive, when battery-backed renewable energy is cheaper, cleaner and far less a contributor to catastrophic climate change that will be an even greater problem for future generations.
Thank you

My attached Submission contends that the proposed Kurri Kurri Power Station would:
• not be needed – there is no supply gap when Liddell closes in 2023
• be incapable of providing dispatchable capacity over extended periods - the fundamental function of a gas-fired power station
• run out of gas after a few hours, even if storage is added, and take a day to recharge, due to its poor location beyond the end of the heavily constrained Sydney-Newcastle gas pipeline
• only be capable of generating at capacity for two days using all its diesel storage as well
• be unlikely to attain its claimed capacity factor of 2% (only)
• ‘compete’ with Snowy Hydro’s nearby Colongra Gas Power Station (capacity factor 0.4%)
• be in the same market as, and be comprehensively outcompeted by, batteries
• cost around $1 billion, not $600 million, all at taxpayer’s expense
• have a market value of less than Colongra’s purchase price ($234 million), with no possibility of a financial return
• not reduce electricity prices (as claimed) and put upward pressure on Hunter gas prices
• involve just 125 jobs (average) over its two-year construction (not up to 600 jobs as claimed), and 10 operational jobs
• emit pollutants over the Hunter/Newcastle region, with a greenhouse gas emission intensity more than 60% that of Liddell, the coal-fired station it is allegedly ‘partly replacing’

My Submission has drawn extensively from a Victoria Energy Policy Centre Research Paper, which I co-authored, that forms an integral part of the Submission. The Paper “Kurri Kurri Power Station: charging taxpayers for hot air” is also attached and can be located at https://www.vepc.org.au/reports-and-working-papers. The Paper concludes that“ there is at best a tiny market for the sort of service that KKPS can offer and so it has no prospect of earning anywhere near the revenues needed to recover its outlay.”

Refer attached

Refer attached

See attachment.